BillyElliot Billy Elliot Mann Mega Moderator Location: Royal Oak, MI Join Date: 08/11/2008 Age: Midlife Crisis Posts: 557 Rally Car: 1996 Honda Civic with VTEC YO! |
Yeah, but can't fit a 6.67 is still pretty high. Highest I've seen for a Honda K series box is 6.33 and they have 6 gears. So while 5th gear would still be worthless, 6 wouldn't be used. In fact, the close ratio kit they make for the K series box uses gears very similar: 2.313 1.650 1.304 1.080 .958 .851 If it wasn't so damn expensive to do a K swap and the engine didn't sit 2 inches lower than a B series, I would have probably done it. But that 6 speed kit above is $3345 with a 6.33 final drive. Or you can go big and spend $6550 for a drop in dog kit which includes a final drive. Or do a 5 speed dogbox for $5650. Although, they do make a B series dog kit for $6500. |
NoCoast Grant Hughes Super Moderator Location: Whitefish, MT Join Date: 01/11/2006 Age: Midlife Crisis Posts: 6,818 Rally Car: BMW |
Well, considering Adam's was damaged on the same event that did this to a set of DMS struts and that the driver and codriver had appointments set with a chiropractor BEFORE they even left for the event means something. Just don't bend your DMS insert. That'll cost you $800 per. We had to replace two inserts in Mark's Impreza one year right before Rally Colorado. We have a big blue tote at the shop full of bent DMS insert and destroyed housings. One complete set that were off of one of Tanner's cars. Fact is in rally you will destroy suspension if you are trying to win. I'd rather have John's stuff and $165 inserts rather than DMS or similar and their $800 inserts. Pretty sure there's some bent Proflex stuff around the shop somewhere too. Or at least there was at the last shop... |
aj_johnson A.J. Johnson Junior Moderator Location: Pendleton OR Join Date: 01/07/2011 Age: Midlife Crisis Posts: 1,381 Rally Car: 88 Audi 80 |
|
john vanlandingham John Vanlandingham Super Moderator Location: Ford Asylum, Sleezattle, WA Join Date: 12/20/2005 Age: Fossilized Posts: 14,152 Rally Car: Saab 96 V4 |
Billy, you are just blabbering. Learn to speak correctly 6.67 is not high. It is in conventional English for all time until the rise in popularity of Inter-net discussion forums been called "low' gearing and colloquially "short". a 3.08 final drive is in conventional English for all time until the rise in popularity of Inter-net discussion forums been called "high" or sometimes "long". Since you clearly understand neither the concepts or the terms try and think this way and its easier: "1st gear" is in a typical shit box 3.65 and we call it "low" gear ---or a pick up with a 5:1 gear we call it Granny Low "TOP" gear aka "high" is like 1:1 or even overdrive or double overdrive so its "higher' than 1:1 Likewise it goes with axle ratios 3.08 is HIGH, and 5.83 is "low", short, whatever. The rest of your stuff is flat silly, no sane person is going to pay $5000+ for a set of ratios virtually identical to the ratios a smart person could buy for $380. I say a smart person because a smart person would have consider this before they bought some dead end, no real parts available at realistic prices car, and thus would have bought a nice rwd car. Try and learn. John Vanlandingham Sleezattle, WA, USA Vive le Prole-le-ralliat www.rallyrace.net/jvab CALL +1 206 431-9696 Remember! Pacific Standard Time is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time. |
john vanlandingham John Vanlandingham Super Moderator Location: Ford Asylum, Sleezattle, WA Join Date: 12/20/2005 Age: Fossilized Posts: 14,152 Rally Car: Saab 96 V4 |
No first in the combo I posted, which, despite keyboard boys' contemptuous dismissal is in fact the typical gear set and final drive on 2,0 BDG powered Escorts, it has a 11.5 overall 1st gear ratio , the combo you suggest is 15:1--about 2 car lengths even if the car revs. For those curious, there was a change in about 88-89 the way many traverse engined boxes did the ratios. PRIOR to then everybody made gear kits and final drive just like the typical RWD set up I posted the yummy ratios for. For example VW sold what guys called "the 8v set' cause it came out when the cars were 8v and final drive was 5.08:1 Right around then both VW and Opel for the wonderful Kadet GSI 16v changed the mix and made 4.2 or 4.25 the final drive and whatever on the gears that came out exactly the same, the difference being the TOOTH COUNTS--a physical change for BIGGER TEETH on the final drive PINION--and top (5th for VW or 6th for Opel) was underdriven like 16% for just about 5.0:1 Can't look at one without the other, gotta look at box and final drive and overall ratios. John Vanlandingham Sleezattle, WA, USA Vive le Prole-le-ralliat www.rallyrace.net/jvab CALL +1 206 431-9696 Remember! Pacific Standard Time is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time. |
Morison Banned Ultra Moderator Location: Calgary, AB Join Date: 03/27/2009 Age: Ancient Posts: 1,798 Rally Car: (ex)86 RX-7(built), (ex)2.5RS (bought) |
Probably irrelevant, but now I'm kind of curious.
Is there any advantage to using longer gears in the box with a shorter final drive vs. using shorter gears in the box with a relatively longer final drive to hit the same overall gearing? I'd think there would be reduced shaft/gearset speeds but have no idea if that has value or relevance. Since you are moving rotating mass, is there a gain in not having to accelerate the mass to the same speed? in a trans-axle car the half-shafts are past the final drive so moving that mass is irrelevant, but in a conventional RWD using a driveshaft between the gears and the final drive is there an advantage to be had in keeping that spinning slower? This is all theoretical, of course, since the availability of gearsets and final drives is probably the real deciding factor. Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/03/2011 04:13PM by Morison. |
john vanlandingham John Vanlandingham Super Moderator Location: Ford Asylum, Sleezattle, WA Join Date: 12/20/2005 Age: Fossilized Posts: 14,152 Rally Car: Saab 96 V4 |
Morison there are advantage this way and that but I have to go pick up Ninotchka....and it does have relevance for us miserable poor clubbie guys. John Vanlandingham Sleezattle, WA, USA Vive le Prole-le-ralliat www.rallyrace.net/jvab CALL +1 206 431-9696 Remember! Pacific Standard Time is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time. |
Morison Banned Ultra Moderator Location: Calgary, AB Join Date: 03/27/2009 Age: Ancient Posts: 1,798 Rally Car: (ex)86 RX-7(built), (ex)2.5RS (bought) |
What ... no immediate long-form answer to a conceptual wondering on my part? UNACCEPTABLE !!!! I wish I could be a 'poor clubbie guy' - one reason I co-drive is that I can't afford to own a car and drive right now. (The other reason is I actually prefer co-driving and the other other reason is that I've given in to the mistress that is organising and helping events actually happen.) |
heymagic Banned Senior Moderator Location: La la land Join Date: 01/25/2006 Age: Fossilized Posts: 3,740 Rally Car: Not a Volvo |
After a point the lower gears can cause the pinion gear to be weaker due to physical size. It seems like they used to claim rotary mazda got wussy after 4.88s. The 5.14ish didn't hold up as well. Beyond that I don't know what is practical vs theoretical for certain. Seems cheaper to buy one gearset for the diff rather than a bunch for a tranny.
|
john vanlandingham John Vanlandingham Super Moderator Location: Ford Asylum, Sleezattle, WA Join Date: 12/20/2005 Age: Fossilized Posts: 14,152 Rally Car: Saab 96 V4 |
Not at all irrelevant, its a good question cause it brings the discussion down to basics, or fundamentals, and that's always good---cause its silly talking about "theoreticals" or effectively un-obtainable stuff like $6000 gear sets.
For less stress on the box itself, yeas its better to have "taller' gears---or pointedly less speed reduction and therefore less toque multipication in power that comes into the box. let's see if these piccies help; ![]() or ![]() And here's a link to T5 since we can look at the effect of differeing torque capacities on otherwise basically same boxes: http://www.therangerstation.com/tech_library/T5ID.htm Notice the horrible 4.03 first gearset with a measly 235 ft/lbs rating, the disgusting 3.97 at 240 ft/lbs, the crappy 3.50 at 250 ft/lbs, the sucky virtually identical to Xratty 3.35 at 260 early and a bit more later and note well the NWC 2.95 gearset at 305 ft/lbs, later 2.95 gearsets at 325 ft/lbs. It all goes down to how much toque is multiplied from input shaft down to cluster gear....like you see in the power flow piccie. Whatever torque the engine makes gets multipled by whatever the ratio is from input shaft down to cluster gear and the box "sees' that increased torque. Reduce it a whole bunch so first is 4.08, the box is stressed X% more than if you reduce only a bit to make first 2.95-everything else --specifically the centerline distance between the 2 shafts. That distance is always the first thing you look at Example the most commonly used rally box in the world for decades is Ford Type9, a 5 speed version of the 4 speed used way back in the Escort MkIIs It's 69mm between shaft centers. The gear company Tran-X makes a version that is 72mm between centers--evidently worth it. Ford wanted something a bit stronger in-house than the Borg Warner T5 so they made MT75, MT75 4x4 and much later the fwd MTX75. Quaiffe makes a direct replacement box for the Type 9 that is 80mm c-c and Fords own Group A 4x4 box was called MS90, 90mm between centers.For comparison the box in my diesel van is a Muncie M89, curiously 89mm between centers for the 2 shafts--so a purpsoe built GpA box is sized like what is suitable for a full sized van with a diesel with who da fawk know what I can tow with it.. But after than the ratio from clutch inputshaft down to cluster is the next prime determinant of what torque the box will tolerate.
Not following the question too well but the kardan or propshaft speed is changing every gear, (in a typical car in first it will be running 1/3.63th crank speed, 1/1.8th crank speed in second etc) the critical speed is what speed is it when in 4th (cause then its running at crankshft speed in a rwd box) or overdrive cause it is spining pretty damn fast
Well for some boxes such as Type 9 the choices are mind numbing, but for some cars its no problem at all cause nothing is made or made in such short runs it is prohibitively expensive... Now on the rear end torque is multiplied one more time with another redcuction gear set and again no or limited choice means we can't get things like ratios with tooth counts or materials for competition like some sizes of US axles, notably Ford 9". There you get not only different alloy than the ubiquitous 8620, but different heat treatments for toughness, not 200,000 miles service. Real competiton stuff may have same ratios as some streety thing but do the ratios with less teeth so the section or base of the tooth is fatter. There's an interesting note in Fords Sierra book in the list of Homologated rear final drives for the stock 7.5" diff which were in 87: 3.64 (51:14) stock<----toothies count, most of the world talks tooth count 4.44 (40:9) 4.63 (51:11) ]4.66 (42:9) 4.88 (44:9) 5.1 (46:9)[/b] The say "Note there are two closely similar "4.6" ratios for the 7 1/2" rear axle which are in fact, completely different designs...The 4.63 ratio (with 51 crown wheel teeth and 11 pinion teeth) is not reccomended for use in the fully tuned Group A SIERRA COSWORTH RS/RS500 Cosworth" The highlighted gears were the common gears used , the shortest earlier with 40mm restrictor "up" to the 4,44 in the 34mm restrictor cars. Engines didn't rev so the made them into toque monsters, and didn't NEED shorter gears. Notice in the normally used gears they go down in tooth count. They were making the things FAT for strength. i think I have a piccie, its shocking. (clop clop clop clop clop clop clop clop clop clop clop clop clop, oh yeah here it is, clop clop clop clop clop clop clop clop ) ![]() Serious, fundamentally different design, for different usage. John Vanlandingham Sleezattle, WA, USA Vive le Prole-le-ralliat www.rallyrace.net/jvab CALL +1 206 431-9696 Remember! Pacific Standard Time is 3 hours behind Eastern Standard Time. Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/04/2011 02:22AM by john vanlandingham. |
Morison Banned Ultra Moderator Location: Calgary, AB Join Date: 03/27/2009 Age: Ancient Posts: 1,798 Rally Car: (ex)86 RX-7(built), (ex)2.5RS (bought) |
Talking theoreticals builds an understanding of what the 'target' is and where you want to try and get to and why. With that understanding you then get to sort out what is truly unobtanium and what is the 'reasonable' route. Piccies not needed, the first part of the quote above would have done just fine. Yah - sorry about that, didn't express myself too well there. I'll try again, but to give you fair warning I am probably over thinking this by shit-ton. Lets look at this from the road back to the engine and assume that the combined gear/final ratios are the same. (so that at the fixed road speed in the same gear the engine speed is the same, but are reached through different combinations of gear set and final drive.) In a conventional RWD platform, the rotational speed of the prop shaft at a given road speed is determined by the final drive ratio. With a taller final drive, the prop shaft rotates slower so the gear set has to rotate faster. SO... to accelerate to a given speed, energy goes into accelerating every piece of the driveline. With a short box and tall final, the gearset would need to be accelerated more than the prop shaft. Conversely, with a tall box and a short final, the prop shaft ends up accelerating more than the gear set. NOW... to make the best use of the power you want to make the job as easy as possible so which ever accelerates easier is what you want to accelerate more. To exaggerate the point - if it were 10x harder to accelerate the prop shaft than the gearset you'd probably want to run a really tall final drive and a really short gearset. The answer would look at the rotational mass and moment arm of the components. Is it is safe to assume a propshaft is heavier than a gear set? Is the mass of a gear set further out from the centre of rotation, making it harder to 'spin up?' At the end of the day I suspect it is a wash or the difference is measured in fractions of percent of performance. Then again, makes me wonder how much acceleration can be gained by a lightweight prop shaft in a short final drive set-up? Would you see more improvement in a short final drive compared to a tall final drive with lightening only the prop shaft? |
SteelSolutions William Timmins Professional Moderator Location: Redmond WA Join Date: 02/26/2008 Age: Midlife Crisis Posts: 648 Rally Car: 3 xr4ti/74 capri/02 bug eye |
|
phlat65 Sean Medcroft Senior Moderator Location: Edmonds, Washington Join Date: 02/12/2009 Age: Possibly Wise Posts: 1,802 Rally Car: Building a Merkur |
|
Rallymech Robert Gobright Mega Moderator Location: White Center Seattle Join Date: 04/27/2008 Age: Possibly Wise Posts: 1,292 Rally Car: 91 VW GTI 8V |
It is much harder to accelerate the mass of a gear set than that of a prop shaft. This is caused by three factors: more mass in the gear set, more bearings (resistance) in the gear set and more mass at a longer distance from the center line of rotation in a gear set.
Again this is all a bit academic because I would always choose the option with stronger gear teeth. Robert. "You are way too normal to be on Rally Anarchy." Eddie Fiorelli. |
heymagic Banned Senior Moderator Location: La la land Join Date: 01/25/2006 Age: Fossilized Posts: 3,740 Rally Car: Not a Volvo |
And I'm pretty sure way more energy is lost to the clutch/flywheel and tires/wheels than you would ever notice on a driveline or mainshaft. |